I'm with you on the DSSD, Sky-Dweller, & Yachtmaster II. Silly looking watches I'd never buy. However, there is no denying watches like the Daytona, GMT, Sub...and Explorer II (tried a few on recently and I think with the wider bracelet and sloped lugs it may be better proportioned than the new GMT or Sub) are serious looking watches with a purpose. Also for many years Daytonas were grossly underpriced when compared to prices of th VC Overseas, AP RO chronos, Breguet chronos, and BP chronos.

I think you unfairly bash Rolex while giving Omega a "Free pass.". You mention Rolex getting scared & giving their watches some Botox. What in the world did Omega do with the Constellation...looks like some serious injection of steroids...and it's not an improvement. The Sea-Master used to completely change appeared every decade and until the last 10-15 years Omega couldn't find classic style..,so there are lots of dated editions from past decades. In addition, Omega even copied the famous "Paul Newman/exotic dial" Daytonas on one vetionof their Speedmaster. The PO is a good watch, but I can't say I would choose it over a Sub. To me the one really great watch they make is the Speedy Pro....but some would say it's current movement isn't as good in terms of quality of materials used current Speedy Pros.

As for JLC, their Master Series and Reversos are great watches. Not sure they are rugged enough to use as daily wearers. I think of the as makers of dress watches(even if Reversos were created for polo. Most of their sport watches are goofy looking.

Even great companies like Patek & JLC, AP and VC have produced"dogs."

IWC is hit or miss in term of designs. As for Sinn, some look quite handsome, but basically they makes cases to stuff rather basic ETA movements in to.

I like lots of brands, and all are subject to making mistakes.Edited by Dino944 - 10/4/12 at 6:33am

The great thing with watches are, is there is a great variety of watches to be enjoyed. As stated by others there are some from each brand which I don't like as much as I like others. However everybody has their own opinion. But the market place usually has a way of eventually dictating who the winners are and who the losers truly are.

I completely understand Kaplan, and I think that the 36mm Explorer really would be a solid choice. I may actually suggest that the more I think about it, as she does wear a less expensive pilot watch from time to time. Thanks!

Quote:

Originally Posted by PartagasIV

...

I will check the Santos 100 out, to be honest I did not really even think about the Santos line. From my quick google search, that looks like a great suggestion!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hayward

On the gift front it looks like Rolex no longer makes the Air King, but do make a 36mm Lady Datejust. That company is just bonkers now. Madoff must've stolen their brains along with their money.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dino944

Unfortunately, as much as I would like to take my mother shopping, my parents are currently on a couples trip in Europe, and both of the husbands have decided to purchase their respective wives a new watch. It is painful to watch my inheritance slipping away from me, one city at a time. At least I am getting a pair of Vass out of the deal (interested to see what my folks pick out...).

That is good to hear about the durability of the Tank Francaise. Personally, that would be my go-to choice for an every day wearer. The lack of water resistance is a bit worrisome, but I think that the watch more than makes up for it in its elegance and classic looks. Once again, I will be sure to check out the Santos more. And I will nix Piaget.

I think that the Rolex Datejust is a solid choice, and probably the "best," but the normalcy of it kind of bothers me. I guess it is not for me though. Personally, I think that aesthetically speaking, the Cartier's watches are just so much more elegant and effeminate than Rolex's. I have not had too much experience with Chopard either, but I read a great article on ThePurists about their Imperiale line.

Thanks for your 2c Dino, always very appreciated.

Quote:

Originally Posted by in stitches

...

Great call on that one... That is definitely in the price range.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hayward

...

Rolex does make a bunch of sense. The practical side always steers towards the darned crown.

Quote:

Originally Posted by oisin

...

I actually thought about the IWC Mark "something." I think that she would actually like that. I am sure some of the olders, smaller ones are kicking around some of the ADs. She wears a pilot watch often, so that is definitely an idea.

newcomer, have you thought about some men's watches? depending on her build, i think some men's watches can look good on women, even moms. My gf's mom sometimes wears an IWC pilot that i think is quite proper on her, and my gf has her dad's AP royal oak that is fantastic (out of that price range though). rolex also seems like a good call.

this is true. have seen ladies looking great, in mens watches.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Newcomer

First off, thanks guys for the suggestions. Now to address...

Great call on that one... That is definitely in the price range.

my pleasure. to me, its pretty much the ideal ladies watch. i wish my wife cared to have one, and that i could buy her one.

Hayward,
I'm with you on the DSSD, Sky-Dweller, & Yachtmaster II. Silly looking watches I'd never buy. However, there is no denying watches like the Daytona, GMT, Sub...and Explorer II (tried a few on recently and I think with the wider bracelet and sloped lugs it may be better proportioned than the new GMT or Sub) are serious looking watches with a purpose. Also for many years Daytonas were grossly underpriced when compared to prices of th VC Overseas, AP RO chronos, Breguet chronos, and BP chronos.
I think you unfairly bash Rolex while giving Omega a "Free pass.". You mention Rolex getting scared & giving their watches some Botox. What in the world did Omega do with the Constellation...looks like some serious injection of steroids...and it's not an improvement. The Sea-Master used to completely change appeared every decade and until the last 10-15 years Omega couldn't find classic style..,so there are lots of dated editions from past decades. In addition, Omega even copied the famous "Paul Newman/exotic dial" Daytonas on one vetionof their Speedmaster. The PO is a good watch, but I can't say I would choose it over a Sub. To me the one really great watch they make is the Speedy Pro....but some would say it's current movement isn't as good in terms of quality of materials used current Speedy Pros.
As for JLC, their Master Series and Reversos are great watches. Not sure they are rugged enough to use as daily wearers. I think of the as makers of dress watches(even if Reversos were created for polo. Most of their sport watches are goofy looking.
Even great companies like Patek & JLC, AP and VC have produced"dogs."
IWC is hit or miss in term of designs. As for Sinn, some look quite handsome, but basically they makes cases to stuff rather basic ETA movements in to.
I like lots of brands, and all are subject to making mistakes.

I can't argue with most of what you say. I do think your assessment of Sinn is a bit unfair. The movements may be stock, but the level of finish is at least the equal of what Rolex does with theirs. And the U and 103 series, at least to me, are the exemplar for "tool watches." The 600 and 700 series, not so much. I'm flipping my 656 as we speak, but my U1 and 103 Ti Ar UTC are keepers.

Actually, it's a shame they aren't selling Tudor in the US anymore, as the Black Bay and Pelagos look interesting. In fact, a scaled down Pelagos in steel would make a nice Sea Dweller successor as opposed to the Deep Sea. Ti would be nice but it seems difficult to get it right - Omega's titanium looks like plastic. Seiko seems to get coated ti right.

Quote:

Originally Posted by robinsongreen68

seriously, they stopped making the air king? that was one of their best, most classic designs with a wonderful aviation heritage. what a shame...

No I goofed here. They still make Air Kings. They are probably the least goofy looking of the line.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dddrees

The great thing with watches are, is there is a great variety of watches to be enjoyed. As stated by others there are some from each brand which I don't like as much as I like others. However everybody has their own opinion. But the market place usually has a way of eventually dictating who the winners are and who the losers truly are.

funny story, a dude tried selling us that watch last week. we turned him down. it was fake. to date, best fake i have ever seen. model and serial number behind the band between lugs, and inside the bezel, he had opened it up and it had the red wheels on the movement, and engraved rolex verbage....very legit looking. but fake nonetheless. we got a warning call a few hours later from another place that bought it, and got stuck holding the bag for 2K.

no reason not to!!
funny story, a dude tried selling us that watch last week. we turned him down. it was fake. to date, best fake i have ever seen. model and serial number behind the band between lugs, and inside the bezel, he had opened it up and it had the red wheels on the movement, and engraved rolex verbage....very legit looking. but fake nonetheless. we got a warning call a few hours later from another place that bought it, and got stuck holding the bag for 2K.

Just curious, as I've never owned a Rolex. Is it possible to verify matching model and serial numbers with a database maintained by the factory, or is the potential collector left to his own devices to determine authenticity?

Lange verifies matching numbers for model, case and movement - I have found this to be useful on both sides of trades.

Just curious, as I've never owned a Rolex. Is it possible to verify matching model and serial numbers with a database maintained by the factory, or is the potential collector left to his own devices to determine authenticity?
Lange verifies matching numbers for model, case and movement - I have found this to be useful on both sides of trades.

rolex is pretty hush hush. patek for example, will send you archived replacement papers for a watch, if you give them certain info, case, ref and movement #s, and even that takes time. rolex doesnt share jack afaik. except maybe turning down a watch for repair after being sent in. but that doesnt help for snap decisions.

there are lists people have made telling you what serial #s are from what years. so if you were a super expert you might see a serial # on a good fake, and know that some specific specs, like bracelet links, or numeral specs... dont match the year the watch purports to be made..... but for the most part, you just need a lot of hands on experience, and need to be able to tell by feel that something is off.